The keyword is "testing". Back then they simply bolt on the new parts on the car and test on their own track. If the results were not satisfactory the part didn't appear on a race weekend.raymondu999 wrote: So say your CFD and windtunnel isn't correlating. Sure, you're updating a bit blind - but obviously parts are still getting manufactured and put on the car, without the benefit of CFD/windtunnel validation. But back before CFD and/or windtunnels were used in F1 - people still updated their cars, and while some upgrades didn't work, some did. Why is it that in Ferrari's case, most aren't? Obviously this is indicative of them actually NOT DESIGNING GOOD PARTS, rather than indicative of the windtunnel. Had they had a better, working CFD and windtunnel kit, then the difference would just be that CFD and the windtunnel (and not the track) tells the engineers that the part was bad.
I hope I'm making my question clear. CFD and windtunnel are not essential in making an actual working upgrade - they help, they expedite the process, but they won't make the car quicker.
As someone already mentioned, they underestimated the trend and didn't put much resources in CFD and simulation.